wrongmove

I think you will have to be extremely quick - almost bound to gap up, I would have thought. edit: the frikkin pound is up by nearly 3c. If people are piling out of dollars into sterling (tempted to use GF's nomenclature here), it's hard to see gold avoiding the flow.

According to Kitco, NY Globex opens in less than half an hour (2300 GMT), then Sydney at midnight and Hong Hong at 0130.

If only my timing was that good! I called the top of the uk housing market about 4 years early! Still, like the PM bulls here, I stuck to my guns and it seems to be working out in the end........

It looks like the dollar is falling quite hard in out of hours trading (as reported by IGIndex, so make of it what you will), so may be a "shiny" start to the week, in dollars at least.

True. "A long term investment" is a "short term trade" gone wrong, and all that! But only for the traders. Many here are resolutely long term, based on their perception of fundamentals, rather than short term, based on technical indicators. Maybe TA vs FA, rather than short term vs long term? Edit: for example, at the moment I am guessing traders are either short or out, whereas this may be a long term buying opportunity based on (perceived) fundamentals.

I do take your points Zitnik, and the fact that it is you making the points (rather than some [funda]mentalist VI who is incapable of seeing the other side of the argument) makes me take them seriously. I think it is best to just wait and see what happens as the price evolves from here. If the situation persists after a few weeks of stable prices, then I will definitely come round. but in the meantime, in the absence of any evidence either way, I will trust Occam's razor (and maybe buy a few silver coins from azazel's link, just in case. I am spending too much time here - those silver coins look a bargain at £10 just as an object, never mind an investment! )

Maybe two seperate threads are needed here? A "trading" thread to discuss short term movements (mainly TA), and an "investment thread for the longer term (mainly FA)? Then, when one of the active traders/investers posted, it would be more obvious what timeframe they are talking about.

They can sell the land all right. Just not at a profit. But I can't prove anything either. I guess we shall see if this mysterious shortage continues after a period of stabilised or rising prices .

But a dealer who avoids buying into a crash, makes more than a dealer who does not. Since July the falls have been precipitous. I can't believe many seasoned dealers were in any hurry to catch that knife. How many developers are buying land at the moment? Well, they make money by dealing in property, but they also know when it is actually more profitable to shift what you have asap and then to just sit on your arse until market conditions improve. I'm not saying there isn't a shortage (although it does seem that some is available at sensible prices in relation to spot), just that it seems obvious to me why there will be shortage when what they are selling has dropped about 40% in such a short time. All conjecture on my part, but I see no compelling reason not to trust Occam's razor here.

£8.47 + Vat for one troy ounce of 99.9% pure in coin form. They are buying at £7.87 (as long as you haven't covered them in dents!) What is the real evidence for this shortage conspiracy? The obvious conclusion is that dealers are reluctant to buy physical in a market tanking quite as dramatically as this. They are professional dealers, not starry eyed idealists. By the time they have spent time and energy recasting, their premium is gone and more. We will see when the price stabilise or starts to rise. I have a suspicion this conspiracy theory will vaporise at this point, but we shall see.

People have been saying "buy on pessimism", but I do not agree with that. Pessimism is not enough, IMHO. Pessimism is what you can see in the housing market. Would you buy just now? No, you want full on desperation, not just mere pessimism. Total capitulation. This is all assuming that we are in a bear market, which by many people's definition, we are (a sustained drop of greater than 20% - though I accept that PMs are a special case to many and should be treated differently. A correction is usually defined as a mere 10% in most markets. I also accept that gold in particular has dropped less in many currencies than it has on the dollar. But it is the dollar denominated trading that counts, IMHO, in setting the price, i.e. a bear in dollars is a bear, even if it is not a bear in roubles or whatever). Hell will freeze over before some capitulate (or will it?), but ignoring them ( ) do I detect at least a faint whiff of capitulation right here on GEI? (not investment advice, of course, just an observation)

Is there a mechanism to bet on volitlity, regardless of direction? i.e. broker says gold will change $100. So you could bet on higher volitility (PoG>900 or <700) or lower (700<PoG<900)

Very interesting chart CC. So gold is sitting on its 2 year moving average (1.75 year to be precise), which is still rising fast, so gold will have to run to keep up. I believe the "big boys" get back to their desks soon (although I think the Leger's day thing is perhaps overstated these days - volumes do not seem to really plunge through the summer). It does look like a vital few weeks are ahead - the resurgent USA story is already losing its shine, so what next? 'Safe havens' (blue chips, gold) or a rush for the exits (cash). It looks to my (amateur, inexperienced eye) like gold will either go to $1000 or $600, but is unlikely to stay where it is. Exciting times indeed!

The concencus opinion seems to be at least another year or two.

Thiat graph shows gold vs. cash in the matress. Most people use interest bearing accounts or bonds to hold their cash. That would be a more realistic comparison, IMHO. But who was in cash all that time anyway? Most people with any amount tend to put it into equities and property. How does gold compare to a diversified portfolio over the years, say 30% (interest bearing) cash, 30% equities, 30% property and 10% commodities? Why this obsession with zero-interest cash accounts? Cash is just a tool, a means, not an end. Sure, there is more of it around than before. But people have a lot more stuff these days, there are a lot more people, and income growth has generally exceed inflation.

US employment numbers worse that expected.

Well, I look forward to you telling me what I really think Steve. Could you at least flesh this out a bit - PM me if you like, it is of no general interest to this board. I do not even read any other gold oriented boards, let alone post on them, btw. My info comes from either here, the general press, or from links posted on Kitco's main page. Could you perhaps post a link to some of these other boards. I can't deny I am intrigued, as well as insulted, by your theories. I happen to know what I think, so it may give me an insight into how the mind of a goldbug/gold bull/whatever works. I am very much not a sterling bull, btw. I just happen to live in the UK, so my ongoing commitments are priced in £ (and mainly fixed, a small portion is subject to inflation), so at 4-5% interest, they are getting cheaper to me by just simply holding cash. I do not currently have the spare capacity to indulge in much speculation (I still hold a handful of shares, fun money). The way the markets are going (all markets), it seems that there are many others coming to the same conclusion about their own finances.

I think it just means Catflap was writing a post.

Yes - causation vs correlation and all that, but I think US was considered to be booming for much of Bush's reign. I think there is a difference in the US to here. Here you might say the right tend to cut taxes and cut spending, whereas the left tend to raise both. In US, the right seem to cut tax, but not cut spending, whereas, I believe, the left tend to be more responsible.

I too am interested in the effect the next president. I posted this on the election thread: It shows that, in general, Reps tend to run up big public deficits, whereas Dems tend to run them back down again. I can't help feeling that the result in November will be influential. From a PM point of view, I would say possibly McCain good, Obama maybe much less so. But it doesn't seem to be factored at all in analysis.

Why, thank you bbt! For the record, my current position in gold is neutral - I am not long or short. I do not hold. Overall, I am in the "buy 10%, and hope it does badly" camp. But until I have a decent sized cache such that 10% would be meaningful, I am out. I really don't have a hidden agenda. What could I possibly achieve if I did? I am not ramping or deramping gold. I am (on the whole) enjoying the debate. My understanding of the intricacies of the economy, and the implications of certain factors have increased greatly from this place, even if I occasionally have the temerity to form my own conclusions I have no interest in playing Devil's Advocate, or simply trying to wind people up. I have been a member here pretty well since the forum began. And no, I am not SN! You cannot claim your fiver!

So what on earth in my hidden agenda, in your view? I can confirm I am unaware of it myself. WYSIWYG. I would say that I present arguments, not just state opinions. I have had many an enjoyable and enlightening (to me) debate here. Depends what you mean by "irk". If simply challenging someones view "irks" them, then they shouldn't be on a forum, IMHO. 1. No. I deliberately said many, not all, or even most. 2. See 1. 3. I would not try to deliberately offend. I have certainly not accused anyone of having a hidden agenda or bluffing, Like you have to me. I find that pretty offensive, to be honest, but I wouldn't be in the kitchen if I couldn't stand the heat. I was clearly referring to Jim Sinclair. The guy who wrote the article I posted, dated July 30th (when gold was $900). I am not making an accusation, simply repeated what was reported by GF, that JS is no longer taking phone calls. I used the word acolyte to mean "A devoted follower or attendant." Yes I did intend to criticise JS. Very much so. You complain about the word acolyte, then expect me to treat him like a sacred cow? I welcome feedback. It is the reason I post. Are you saying that JS is above critism, just because some on this board follow him? But before you respond to any of this, please let me know how what I think and what I post differ. I am intrigued to know. Just to clarify, this is one of JS's articles, July 30 2008, PoG~$900. I am just trying to point out that JS can get it totally wrong. So just because he said something, doesn't mean I am going to treat it as fact.

This is getting silly. I am not a gold hater or a gold lover. The world is not black and white. I am certainly a gold sceptic, as far as some of the more "outrageous" predictions are concerned. I don't just keep posting "gold will go down", ad nauseum, while many just post "gold will go up", ad naeseum. I also do not resort to attacks on the poster, rather than what they have posted. So please, again, what are you actually accusing me of, other than not agreeing with your every word?

A tell is just a giveaway of a bluff. What exactly is your point here? And what exactly are you accusing me of?